Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Gemma 3 vs Llama 4 Scout

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

GetInfoUs 연구팀 검토 완료최종 검토일: October 2026편집 정책
공유
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Gemma 3 vs Llama 4 Scout: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Gemma 3 by Google and Llama 4 Scout by Meta represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, both models offer identical input token rates. On output generation, costs are matched. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, Llama 4 Scout provides an expanded memory horizon with 3,500K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemma 3 leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.

1:1 모델 맞대결 비교 (VS)

원하는 AI 모델 선택 및 실시간 비교

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Google

Gemma 3

오픈 웨이트 모델

Google의 Gemma 3 모델은 131K 토큰 컨텍스트 윈도우와 입력 $0/1M 토큰, 출력 $0/1M 토큰의 합리적인 API 요금을 제공하며 코딩, 추론 및 엔터프라이즈 자동화에 최적화되어 있습니다.

Intelligence Index68 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

131.1K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Meta

Llama 4 Scout

오픈 웨이트 모델

Meta의 Llama 4 Scout 모델은 3.5M 토큰 컨텍스트 윈도우와 입력 $0/1M 토큰, 출력 $0/1M 토큰의 합리적인 API 요금을 제공하며 코딩, 추론 및 엔터프라이즈 자동화에 최적화되어 있습니다.

Intelligence Index76 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

3.5M tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

한눈에 보는 핵심 차이점

  • Both models cost the same under this workload — choose on capability, not price.
  • Llama 4 Scout has a larger context window (4M vs 131K tokens).
  • Gemma 3 is faster at 105 tok/s vs 95 tok/s.
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureGemma 3Llama 4 Scout
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
6876
Provider
GoogleMeta
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
131.1K tokens~197 A4 pages of text3.5M tokens~5,250 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
16K33K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
105 tok/s95 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
N/AN/A
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
61%N/A

부문별 우위 모델

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding

Evaluations ongoing

Cost
Tied
Identical monthly runtime cost
Speed
Gemma 3
+11% faster generation
Context
Llama 4 Scout
3.5M tokens window

검증된 벤치마크 점수 비교

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Gemma 3Llama 4 Scout
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

61%vsN/A
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

78%vs78%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1335ptsvs1370pts
Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

N/Avs92.5%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

105 tok/s vs95 tok/s

지연 시간(Latency) 및 응답 속도

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Gemma 30.32s
Llama 4 Scout0.65s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Gemma 35.08s
Llama 4 Scout5.91s

실시간 API 토큰 비용 시뮬레이터

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Gemma 3 Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Llama 4 Scout Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
These models cost the same under this workload — no savings either way.Break-even

Gemma 3 · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Google의 첨단 Native multimodal open transformer with expanded context 아키텍처와 최대 131K 토큰 컨텍스트 지원
  • 경쟁력 있는 API 가격(입력 $0/1M, 출력 $0/1M)과 빠른 응답 속도
  • 코드 생성, 복잡한 논리 추론 및 다국어 벤치마크에서 검증된 성능 발휘
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 대규모 장문 컨텍스트 처리 시 토큰 비용 및 호출 한도 관리가 필요함
  • 특수 도메인 작업에서는 정교한 프롬프트 엔지니어링과 RAG 연동이 권장됨

Llama 4 Scout · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Meta의 첨단 Extreme-context sparse MoE multimodal transformer (17B active / 109B total) 아키텍처와 최대 3.5M 토큰 컨텍스트 지원
  • 경쟁력 있는 API 가격(입력 $0/1M, 출력 $0/1M)과 빠른 응답 속도
  • 코드 생성, 복잡한 논리 추론 및 다국어 벤치마크에서 검증된 성능 발휘
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 대규모 장문 컨텍스트 처리 시 토큰 비용 및 호출 한도 관리가 필요함
  • 특수 도메인 작업에서는 정교한 프롬프트 엔지니어링과 RAG 연동이 권장됨

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricGemma 3Llama 4 Scout
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.00$0.00
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
5K10K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

기술 사양 (Specifications)

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureGemma 3Llama 4 Scout
Official API Model ID (SDK)models/gemma-3meta-llama/Llama-4-Scout
API ProtocolGoogle Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDKOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2025-032025-04
Knowledge CutoffDecember 2024January 2025
ArchitectureNative multimodal open transformer with expanded contextExtreme-context sparse MoE multimodal transformer (17B active / 109B total)
Parameters1B / 4B / 12B / 27B17B (109B total MoE)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)
Computer Use / GUI AgentSupported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 2 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 4 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 11 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 37 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationGoogle DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework VerifiedOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision
Output Modalitiestexttext

Gemma 3 vs Llama 4 Scout: 핵심 요약 문답 (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Gemma 3 or Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout is more intelligent. It scores 76 compared with 68 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemma 3 is faster, generating 105 tokens per second compared with 95 tokens per second.

Which model has lower latency?

Gemma 3 has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.32s compared with 0.65s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Llama 4 Scout has a larger context window, supporting 3.5M tokens compared with 131.1K tokens.

종합 평가

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Gemma 3 if your priority is Self-hosted multimodal applications, local image QA, and long document parsing. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Llama 4 Scout if your workflow prioritizes Whole-repository code analysis, multi-hour video understanding, and legal book ingestion. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

자주 묻는 질문 (FAQ)

How does Gemma 3 compare to Llama 4 Scout in API token pricing and cost per token?+

Both Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout are open-weights foundation models available at $0.00 direct API cost when self-hosted, or offered at identical baseline rates across major inference providers. Model selection depends on GPU deployment sizing and specialized benchmark performance rather than raw token price.

Which model has a larger context window: Gemma 3 or Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 supports a context window of 131K tokens (~98k words), while Llama 4 Scout supports 3,500K tokens (~2,625k words). Therefore, Llama 4 Scout can process more textual data and document context in a single prompt.

Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Gemma 3 or Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 scores at the frontier of coding benchmarks, while Llama 4 Scout scores competitively for software generation. For complex autonomous debugging and agentic engineering, Gemma 3 provides robust code generation and tool calling.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 is optimized for low-latency direct generation. In contrast, Llama 4 Scout focuses on standard fast inference.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout?+

Gemma 3 generates approximately 105 tokens per second, while Llama 4 Scout delivers 95 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Gemma 3 provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Gemma 3 and Llama 4 Scout to optimize costs?+

Yes! Tiered multi-model routing can optimize for latency and accuracy: you can route high-frequency conversational turns and latency-sensitive queries to Gemma 3, and route deep architectural or complex reasoning queries to Gemma 3. This balanced routing strategy maximizes system throughput and answer quality.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

공식 출처: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs